I don't quite grasp what the fuzz is about in that case. The software in question was not software bought in a store by a private person, but software licensed to a company from the software manufactorer. This is quite normal, companies typically buy licenses for software and not the software itself, and the content of the license is typically negotiatable - for example in the company I work for, we have software with licenses that allow us to install the software on our private machines and machines owned by our family members, not just company machines - these features in the license were negotiated. Naturally it does not mean any of our family members can then sell the said software on ebay as they see fit.
So, in my view, the ones who should be in court here is the company that sold this guy the software in the first place, or the individuals in the company that did it - they broke the license agreements, they are the ones that should cover the cost here.
